Efficacy of zoledronate, denosumab or teriparatide in postmenopausal women with type 2 diabetes mellitus at high risk of fragility fractures: protocol of an open, blinded endpoint randomized controlled pilot trial
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER:
PROVIDER: S-EPMC10590540 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Jan
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundOsteoporosis medications increase bone-mineral density (BMD) and lower but do not eliminate fracture risk. The combining of anabolic agents with bisphosphonates has not improved efficacy. We compared combined teriparatide and denosumab with both agents alone.MethodsFrom September, 2009, to January, 2011, we enrolled postmenopausal women with osteoporosis into this randomised, controlled trial. Patients were assigned in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive 20 μg teriparatide daily, 60 mg denosumab every 6 months, or both. BMD was measured at 0, 3, 6, and 12 months. Women who completed at least one study visit after baseline were assessed in a modified intention-to-treat analysis. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00926380.Findings94 (94%) of 100 eligible women completed at least one study visit after baseline. At 12 months, posterior-anterior lumbar spine BMD increased more in the combination group (9·1%, [SD 3·9]) than in the teriparatide (6·2% [4·6], p=0·0139) or denosumab (5·5% [3·3], p=0·0005) groups. Femoral-neck BMD also increased more in the combination group (4·2% [3·0]) than in the teriparatide (0·8% [4·1], p=0·0007) and denosumab (2·1% [3·8], p=0·0238) groups, as did total-hip BMD (combination, 4·9% [2·9]; teriparatide, 0·7% [2·7], p<0·0001; denosumab 2·5% [2·6], p=0·0011).InterpretationCombined teriparatide and denosumab increased BMD more than either agent alone and more than has been reported with approved therapies. Combination treatment might, therefore, be useful to treat patients at high risk of fracture.FundingAmgen, Eli Lilly, National Center for Research Resources.
| S-EPMC4083737 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The Asian and Latin America Fracture Observational Study (ALAFOS) is a prospective, observational, single-arm study conducted in 20 countries across Asia, Latin America and the Middle East. ALAFOS evaluated new clinical vertebral and non-vertebral fragility fractures in relation to time on teriparatide, in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis in real-life clinical practice. Clinical fragility fractures, back pain, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) were recorded in 6-month intervals for ≤ 24 months during teriparatide treatment and up to 12-months post-treatment. Data were analysed with piecewise exponential regression with inverse probability weighting for time to event outcomes and mixed-model repeated measures for back pain and HRQoL. 3054 postmenopausal women started teriparatide and attended ≥ one follow-up visit (mean [SD] age 72.5 [10.4] years). The median (95% CI) time to treatment discontinuation was 22.0 months (21.2, 22.8). During the treatment period, 111 patients (3.6%) sustained 126 clinical fractures (2.98 fractures/100 patient-years). Rates of new clinical fragility fractures were significantly decreased during the > 6-12, > 12-18, and > 18-24-month periods, as compared with the first 6 months of treatment (hazard ratio [HR] 0.57; 95% CI 0.37, 0.88; p = 0.012; HR 0.35; 95% CI 0.19, 0.62; p < 0.001; HR 0.43; 95% CI 0.23, 0.83; p = 0.011; respectively). Patients also reported an improvement in back pain and HRQoL (p < 0.001). These results provide data on the real-world effectiveness of teriparatide in the ALAFOS regions and are consistent with other studies showing reduction of fractures after 6 months of teriparatide treatment. These results should be interpreted in the context of the noncontrolled design of this observational study.
| S-EPMC8732800 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundA rapid increase in bone turnover and bone loss has been observed in response to the discontinuation of denosumab. It led to an acute increase in the fracture risk, similar to that observed in the untreated patients. We aimed to investigate the effect of denosumab on osteoclast (OC) precursor cells compared to that of zoledronate.MethodsThe study compared the effects of denosumab (60 mg/24-week) and zoledronate (5 mg/48-week) over 48 weeks in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. From patients' peripheral mononuclear cells, CD14+/CD11b+/vitronectin receptor (VNR)- and CD14+/CD11b+/VNR+ cells were isolated using fluorescent-activated cell sorting, representing early and late OC precursors, respectively. The primary endpoint was the changes in OC precursors after 48 weeks of treatment.ResultsAmong the 23 patients, 11 were assigned to the denosumab group and 12 to the zoledronate group (mean age, 69 years). After 48 weeks, the changes in OC precursors were similar between and within the groups. Serum C-terminal telopeptide of type I collagen levels were inversely correlated with OC precursor levels after denosumab treatment (r=-0.72, P<0.001). Lumbar spine, femur neck, and total hip bone mineral density (BMD) increased in both groups. Lumbar spine BMD increased more significantly in the denosumab group than in the zoledronate group.ConclusionsDenosumab and zoledronate treatments induced similar changes in OC precursors. During denosumab treatment, old age and suppressed bone turnover were associated with increased OC precursor cell populations. Further validation studies with prospective designs are required.
| S-EPMC9208900 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Aim: Evidence on the efficacy of combination treatment of teriparatide and denosumab for osteoporosis remains controversial. We aim to compare the efficacy between the combination treatment and monotherapy among patients with postmenopausal osteoporosis. Methods and results: We systematically searched PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science up to 26 January 2022, for relevant studies. This meta-analysis reviewed all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that reported on the combination treatment of teriparatide and denosumab in patients with postmenopausal osteoporosis. The articles were examined individually by two reviewers, and the relevant data was extracted. We combined weighted mean difference (WMD) for bone mineral density (BMD) using random- or fixed- effect models and conducted subgroup analyses. Sensitivity analyses were performed, and possible publication bias was also assessed. Overall, combination treatment enhanced the mean percent change of bone mineral density in lumbar spine than monotherapy (WMD = 2.91, 95%CI: 1.983.83; p = 0.00). And, combination treatment has been beneficial for enhancing the mean percent change of BMD in hip (WMD = 3.19, 95%CI: 2.25∼4.13; p = 0.00). There was no significant difference between combination treatment and monotherapy in terms of the adverse events (RR = 0.81, 95%CI: 0.45∼1.45; p = 0.472). Conclusion: The meta-analysis indicates that combination treatment led to greater BMD at the lumbar spine and hip in comparison to monotherapy, without an increased incidence of adverse events. Systematic Review Registration: (https://inplasy.com/), identifier (Inplasy Protocol 2734).
| S-EPMC9170942 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC4620731 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIn the Denosumab and Teriparatide Administration (DATA) study, we showed that denosumab fully inhibits teriparatide-induced bone resorption while allowing for continued teriparatide-induced bone formation, resulting in larger increases in hip and spine bone mineral density (BMD) than with either drug alone. We aimed to assess whether administration of denosumab with high dose teriparatide would stimulate larger increases in bone mass than those observed in the DATA study.MethodsDATA-HD was an open-label, randomised, controlled phase 4 trial done at Massachusetts General Hospital. Eligible women were postmenopausal women (at least 36 months since last menses or since hysterectomy with a follicle-stimulating hormone concentration of ≥40 U/L) with osteoporosis. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive teriparatide 20 μg (standard dose) or 40 μg (high dose) daily via subcutaneous injection for 9 months. At 3 months, both groups were started on denosumab 60 mg every 6 months via subcutaneous injection for 12 months. Areal BMD (aBMD) was measured at 0, 3, 9, and 15 months. Treatment was given open label, but outcome assessors were masked. The primary endpoint was percentage change from baseline in spine areal BMD (aBMD) at 15 months. Women who completed at least one study visit after baseline were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis. Safety was assessed in all randomly assigned participants. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02176382.FindingsBetween Oct 15, 2014, and June 10, 2016, 269 women were assessed for eligibility. 76 participants were randomly assigned to 20 μg teriparatide (n=39) or 40 μg teriparatide (n=37), of whom 69 completed at least one post-baseline visit. At 15 months, mean spine aBMD had increased to a significantly greater extent in the 40 μg group (17·5% [SD 6·0] increase) than the 20 μg group (9·5% [3·2]; difference 8·1%, 95% CI 5·5 to 10·6, p<0·0001). Mean femoral neck aBMD had also increased to a greater extent in the 40 μg group (6·8% [SD 4·1] increase) than the 20 μg group (4·3% [3·7]; difference 2·5%, 0·5 to 4·5, p=0·04), as did mean total hip aBMD (40 μg group, 6·1% [3·4] increase; 20 μg group, 3·9% [2·9] increase; difference 2·2%, 0·6 to 3·8, p<0·0001). 30 (77%) of 39 participants in the 20 μg group and 29 (78%) of 37 participants in the 40 μg group had an adverse event, and seven (18%) and two (5%) patients had serious adverse events. The most frequent adverse events were joint pain (15 [38%]), muscle cramp (15 [38%]), and fatigue (12 [31%]) in the 20 μg group group and fatigue (14 [38%]), nausea (16 [43%]), and joint pain (17 [46%]) in the 40 μg group. No deaths were reported.InterpretationCombined treatment with teriparatide 40 μg and denosumab increases spine and hip BMD more than standard combination therapy. This large and rapid increase in bone mass suggest that this high dose regimen might provide a method of restoring skeletal integrity in patients with osteoporosis.FundingNational Institutes of Health and the Dart Foundation.
| S-EPMC6980341 | biostudies-literature
Project description:There is no consensus on an optimal treatment after daily teriparatide (TPTD). We performed a prospective, randomized, open-label, 12-month trial to investigate the efficacy of follow-up treatment after daily TPTD treatment for Japanese patients. Three-hundred patients were enrolled in this study. Patients received oral bisphosphonate (BP) including alendronate (ALN; 35?mg/week) and minodoronate (MINO; 50?mg/month), or subcutaneous denosumab (60?mg/6 month). The primary efficacy measure was bone mineral density (BMD) responses in the lumbar spine (LS) and femoral neck (FN). Lumbar spine BMD increased by 1.3?±?5.1% in the ALN subgroups, 0.5?±?4.6% in the MINO subgroups, and 4.3?±?3.5% in the denosumab subgroups. Femoral neck BMD increased by 0.7?±?4.6% in the ALN subgroups, 0.2?±?4.6% in the MINO subgroups, and 1.4?±?3.4% in the denosumab subgroups. Lumbar spine BMD increases were significantly greater in the denosumab subgroup than the BP subgroups. There were no significant differences in FN BMD increases among the three subgroups. Lumbar spine BMD increases were significantly greater in the denosumab subgroup than the BP subgroups, whereas FN BMD increases were not significant. Denosumab treatment was more effective in increasing BMD and therefore has the potential benefit of fracture prevention. Further research is warranted to determine the optimal treatment after daily TPTD. © 2018 The Authors. JBMR Plus published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.
| S-EPMC6139701 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This case-control study investigated the impact of switching from bisphosphonates to denosumab, teriparatide, or romosozumab in postmenopausal osteoporosis. Romosozumab demonstrated the most significant improvements in bone mineral density, particularly in the lumbar spine and total hip, by reducing bone resorption and increasing bone formation markers.PurposeTo investigate the impact of switching from bisphosphonates (BP) to denosumab (DMAb), teriparatide (TPTD), or romosozumab (ROMO) in postmenopausal osteoporosis.MethodsThis retrospective, case-controlled, multicenter study included 389 patients who switched from BP to DMAb, TPTD, or ROMO due to treatment inefficacy. Propensity score matching was used to align patient backgrounds, resulting in 45 patients per group. Baseline characteristics included a mean age of 73.8 years, prior BP treatment duration of 37.1 months, and bone mineral density (BMD) T-scores of -2.8 in the lumbar spine (LS), -2.5 in the total hip (TH), and -2.7 in femoral neck (FN). BMD and bone turnover markers were assessed over 12 months.ResultsFollowing the switch from BP, the ROMO group demonstrated a dual effect of decreased bone resorption and increased bone formation markers. The TPTD group exhibited the highest increases in both markers, while the DMAb group suppressed both. After 12 months, the ROMO group demonstrated significantly greater BMD increases in the LS (11.4%) compared to the DMAb (6.3%; p < 0.001) and TPTD (5.9%; p < 0.001) groups. Additionally, the ROMO group showed greater increases in the TH (3.3%) than TPTD group (0.8%; p < 0.01). Only the ROMO group showed a significant BMD increase in the FN (2.0%; p < 0.01 from baseline).ConclusionSignificant BMD increases were observed in the LS for all groups, in the TH for the ROMO and DMAb groups, and in the FN for the ROMO group. ROMO showed the most substantial BMD improvements following BP therapy.
| S-EPMC11882683 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: The comparison of the efficacy of zoledronate and denosumab for treating osteoporosis is controversial, and few randomized controlled trials have compared these two drugs in practical patients with acute osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (OVCFs). We conducted a randomized controlled study to compare the efficacy of zoledronate and denosumab in patients with acute OVCF, with a focus on the occurrence of new OVCF. Methods: We enrolled 206 subjects who had their first acute OVCF, without any previous history of osteoporosis medication. The patients were randomly assigned to receive either intravenous zoledronate once a year or subcutaneous denosumab twice a year. We investigated the OVCF recurrence, clinical outcome, bone mineral density (BMD), and bone turnover markers over 12 months. Results: The final cohort comprised 89 participants (mean age of 75.82 ± 9.34 years, including 74 women [83.15%]) in the zoledronate group and 86 patients (mean age of 75.53 ± 10.23 years, including 71 women [82.56%]) in the denosumab group. New OVCFs occurred in 8 patients (8.89%) in the zoledronate group and 11 patients (12.79%) in the denosumab group (odds ratio, 1.485 [95% confidence interval, 0.567-3.891], p = 0.419). No significant difference was observed in the survival analysis between the two groups (p = 0.407). The clinical outcome, including the visual analog scale score for pain and simple radiographic findings, did not differ between the two groups. The changes in BMD and bone turnover markers were also not significantly different between the two groups. Additionally, drug-related adverse events did not differ between the groups in terms of safety. Conclusions: The efficacy of zoledronate was comparable to that of denosumab in terms of the occurrence of new OVCFs, as well as of the overall clinical course in patients with their first acute OVCF. Notably, this study represents the first comparison of these two drugs in patients with acute OVCF. However, further research with large-scale and long-term follow-up is necessary.
| S-EPMC11012809 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ContextCurrent osteoporosis medications increase bone mineral density (BMD) modestly and reduce, but do not eliminate, fracture risk. Attempts to improve efficacy by administering anabolic agents and bisphosphonates concomitantly have been unsuccessful. Conversely, 12 months of concomitant denosumab and teriparatide therapy increases BMD more than either drug alone.ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to determine whether 24 months of combined denosumab and teriparatide will increase hip and spine BMD more than either individual agent.DesignPreplanned continuation of the Denosumab and Teriparatide Administration (DATA) randomized controlled trial in which postmenopausal osteoporotic women received teriparatide (20 μg daily), denosumab (60 mg every 6 months), or both medications for 24 months.ParticipantsParticipants were 94 postmenopausal women with osteoporosis.Outcome measuresLumbar spine, femoral neck, total hip, and distal radius BMD and serum markers of bone turnover were measured.ResultsAt 24 months, lumbar spine BMD increased more in the combination group (12.9 ± 5.0%) than in either the teriparatide (9.5 ± 5.9%, P = .01) or denosumab (8.3 ± 3.4%, P = .008) groups. Femoral neck BMD also increased more in the combination group (6.8 ± 3.6%) than in either the teriparatide (2.8 ± 3.9%, P = .003) or denosumab (4.1 ± 3.8%, P = .008) groups. Similarly, total hip BMD increased more in the combination group (6.3 ± 2.6%) than in the teriparatide (2.0 ± 3.0%) or denosumab (3.2 ± 2.5%) groups (P < .001 for both). Although spine and hip BMD continued to increase in the second year in all groups, these year 2 increases did not differ among groups. Serum C-telopeptide and N-terminal propeptide of type 1 procollagen were equally suppressed in the denosumab and combination groups, whereas osteocalcin decreased more in the denosumab group than in the combination group, a difference that persisted, but lessened, in the second year of therapy.ConclusionsTwo years of concomitant teriparatide and denosumab therapy increases BMD more than therapy with either medication alone and more than has been reported with any current therapy. The combination of these agents may prove to be an important treatment option in patients at high risk of fracture.
| S-EPMC4010689 | biostudies-literature